Discovery Dispute
Plaintiff digEcor, by motion for protective order, objects to e.Digital’s discovery requests5 on several grounds.6 Generally, these are that the requests are overly broad, unduly burdensome, and impermissible because the requests seek sensitive trade secret and confidential commercial information.7
Most specifically, Plaintiff digEcor contends that the requests seek information that is irrelevant to e.Digital’s counterclaims.8 Plaintiff digEcor argues that deposition testimony and affidavits9 show that the design of its XT is in no way based on e.Digital’s proprietary or confidential information and that this factual showing makes the requests irrelevant.

However, it is clear that digEcor and two of the digEcor Suppliers (DeCuir, Inc. and Wolf Electronix) possessed e.Digital confidential information from the original digEplayer design.10 digEcor does not deny that e.Digital confidential information was transmitted to digEcor and two of its suppliers prior to the development of the digEplayer XT.11
Defendant e.Digital identifies several specific facts supporting its belief that e.Digital confidential information was used in the development of the digEplayer XT.12
Defendant e.Digital contends the following specific facts support its belief that its information may have been used in the development of the digEplayer XT:
(1) Mr. Hurst, a digEcor employee, discussed sharing schematics containing e.Digital proprietary information with Triad Engineering;
(2) e.Digital shared its “technical data package” with DeCuir, Inc. (developer of the digEplayer XT specification);
(3) meeting minutes drafted by Decuir representatives, and emails from them, discuss the usefulness of e.Digital information;
(4) the use of e.Digital design documents to adapt the digEplayer components to fit in digEcor’s next-generation video player; and
(5) e.Digital’s transmission to digEcor of documents that would have aided in the design of the digEplayer XT.13
Defendant e.Digital also points out that the deposition testimony of the DeCuir and Triad representatives, relied on by Plaintiff digEcor in support of its motion, was taken without the third-party documents e.Digital requested via subpoenas. 14 This is due to Plaintiff digEcor’s Motion to Quash.